Chiropractic Students Under Siege: NBCE's Part IV Con Game

The National Board of Chiropractic Examiners (NBCE) has recently announced its decision to centralize the Part IV exam in Greeley, Colorado, a move they claim is a strategic advancement for the chiropractic profession. However, a deeper examination of the arguments presented reveals a series of 25 logical fallacies and errors in critical thinking that undermine the validity of the claims made in their press release. By manipulating the profession into accepting centralized testing, the NBCE not only overlooks the actual needs of students and educational institutions but also disregards viable alternatives that could ensure competency without absolute central control. This report aims to dissect these logical fallacies, shed light on the lack of evidence for the NBCE's claims, and reveal how this manipulation serves to maintain and expand their monopoly over chiropractic licensure.

CLICK HERE for copy of the NBCE press release

CLICK HERE for related article

CLICK HERE for more on the effort to restore freedom in chiropractic

Understanding Logical Fallacies

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that undermine the logic of an argument. They often appear persuasive on the surface but fail to hold up under scrutiny, leading to misleading or false conclusions. These fallacies can distort the truth, manipulate audiences, and distract from core issues. In the context of the NBCE's press release, several prominent logical fallacies are employed to persuade stakeholders to accept the centralization of Part IV testing without question. Below, we explore the specific fallacies present and the tactics used by the NBCE to legitimize their position, but it lacks substantial supporting evidence. 

Circular Argument 

One of the most pervasive fallacies in the NBCE's press release is the circular argument. The press release asserts that state licensing boards require independent clinical skills assessments to ensure competency. However, it fails to explain why such independent assessments are necessary in the first place, merely reiterating that they are required because they have been imposed. This reasoning is circular, as it presupposes the necessity of the assessments without providing any justification beyond their existence. 

Appeal to Authority 

The press release also relies heavily on an appeal to authority, citing the authority of the NBCE and state licensing boards as justification for the proposed changes. While referencing authority can be appropriate in some cases, the NBCE's claims lack the necessary supporting evidence to substantiate their arguments. Merely stating that these bodies require centralized testing does not prove that it leads to improved competency, professional integrity, or public trust. Without data or empirical evidence to back these claims, the appeal to authority is weak and unconvincing. 

Bandwagon Fallacy 

Another logical misstep present is the bandwagon fallacy. The NBCE implies that because the Part IV exam is standardized and independently administered, it inherently ensures uniform competency among candidates and upholds the integrity of the chiropractic profession. This reasoning assumes that standardized testing is superior simply because it is widely adopted, without providing evidence of its effectiveness. Just because a practice is widespread does not mean it is the best or only method for evaluating clinical skills. 

Hasty Generalization 

The NBCE also engages in hasty generalization by making broad claims about the benefits of centralization without providing sufficient evidence. For instance, the press release states that centralizing exams will guarantee uniform evaluation and remove regional discrepancies. However, no data or studies are cited to support this sweeping statement, leaving stakeholders to question the validity of these conclusions. 

False Dilemma 

A false dilemma is presented when the NBCE suggests that the only options for ensuring competency are either relying solely on in-school testing or using a centralized third-party exam. This ignores the possibility of alternative solutions, such as enhancing current school-based assessments or establishing regional testing centers that could achieve similar outcomes without the drawbacks of a centralized model. By framing the issue as a binary choice, the NBCE limits the scope of potential solutions and misleads stakeholders into believing there are no viable alternatives. 

Red Herring

The NBCE's press release also employs a red herring by focusing on peripheral benefits like cost savings, research and development, and community building. These supposed benefits are used to distract from the core issue: the lack of evidence supporting the necessity and effectiveness of the Part IV exam. Even if these benefits were true, they do not address the fundamental concerns about the validity, impact, and necessity of the centralized exam. 

Appeal to Emotion 

The press release makes an appeal to emotion by emphasizing the alleged benefits of the centralized testing model for the chiropractic profession and the public. By invoking positive emotions such as trust and confidence, the NBCE attempts to gloss over the lack of substantive evidence for their claims. This tactic serves to mask the shortcomings of their argument and manipulate stakeholders into supporting their decision without critically evaluating the underlying facts. 

Analysis of False Claims 

The following section list each specific claim made by the NBCE in their press release that lack evidence or are nonsensical. These claims reflect the flaws in their reasoning, which include unsupported assertions, misrepresentations of necessity, and overstatements of benefits. We examine each claim in detail, exposing the lack of substantial evidence or logical basis. 

Claims Made in by the NBCE Lacking Evidence or Are Nonsensical

1. "While chiropractic colleges play a vital role in educating and training future chiropractors, relying solely on in-school testing for clinical skills may not be sufficient for licensure."
• There is no evidence provided to support the claim that in-school testing is insufficient for determining clinical skills. Chiropractic colleges are accredited and conduct rigorous assessments that should suffice.
2. "Variations in assessment styles and rigor among colleges can lead to inconsistencies in skill evaluation."
• The NBCE does not provide any data or specific examples showing that these alleged inconsistencies have led to issues in skill evaluation or patient outcomes.
3. "Factors such as differing educational approaches and examination conditions may affect the outcomes of in-school tests."
• There is no supporting evidence to demonstrate that these differing conditions lead to significant enough variations that justify the need for a centralized third-party exam.
4. "State licensing boards require an independently administered clinical skills assessment to ensure a uniform standard of competency across all practitioners."
• This is a circular argument, implying that the requirement exists solely because it has been imposed without questioning if it is necessary. Other healthcare professions (MDs, DOs) have moved away from such standardized exams.
5. "A standardized, independent practical exam like the NBCE Part IV ensures that all candidates, regardless of where they are educated, meet the same stringent criteria required by state licensing boards, thereby upholding the integrity of the chiropractic profession."
• There is no evidence that Part IV has improved competency or upheld integrity. No data on outcomes or proof that passing Part IV results in better practitioners has been provided.
6. "Centralizing exams guarantees uniform evaluation, removing regional discrepancies and ensuring fair, consistent assessments, crucial for licensure integrity."
• There is no evidence provided to suggest that regional discrepancies are a significant problem or that centralizing the exam eliminates these issues effectively.
7. "By consolidating the exam to a single location, the NBCE can optimize the use of resources, reducing redundancy and operational costs."
• While cost efficiency is claimed, there is no data showing how this benefits students, especially considering the increased travel and lodging costs that they must bear.
8. "This efficiency translates into cost savings that can be reinvested into improving the exam process and maintaining reasonable exam fees, which benefits the entire profession."
• No details or projections are provided about how cost savings will be passed on to students, or even if they will be. The actual financial burden on students seems to increase, not decrease.
9. "A centralized facility can serve as a hub for ongoing research and development in chiropractic assessment."
• This is a vague claim without any clear description of what research will be conducted and how it will directly benefit the profession or students.
10. "The new centralized testing facility in Greeley will operate 48 weeks out of the year, offering multiple testing dates and greater scheduling flexibility."
• This ignores the fact that scheduling flexibility is meaningless if candidates cannot afford the increased travel costs or must bear other logistical burdens to attend an exam at a single distant location.
11. "This flexibility can also lead to better performance, as candidates can take the exam when they feel most prepared."
• There is no evidence provided to support the idea that travel to a centralized facility results in better exam performance. The added burden of travel may, in fact, increase stress and hinder performance.
12. "The NBCE is actively working to mitigate travel costs through negotiations with local hotels and airlines for discounted rates."
• The concept of mitigating travel costs through discounts is insufficient to address the larger issue of requiring students to travel long distances, which remains an unnecessary financial burden.
13. "Centralizing the exam fosters a sense of community among examinees, who will have the opportunity to interact with peers from different regions."
• There is no evidence that a high-stakes exam setting fosters community. Interaction during a stressful, testing-focused environment is unlikely to yield the claimed benefits of networking and community-building.
14. "By ensuring that all licensed chiropractors have met rigorous and standardized requirements, the profession can enhance public trust and confidence."
• There is no data provided showing that the Part IV exam has contributed to public trust. The medical and osteopathic professions have maintained public trust without relying on similar exams.
15. "Enhanced standardization, improved training and evaluation mechanisms, better resource utilization, and increased accessibility and flexibility are just a few of the advantages that will ultimately elevate the quality of chiropractic care."
• There is no empirical evidence provided to support the claim that these changes will elevate the quality of chiropractic care. The NBCE has not presented any outcomes data to demonstrate a connection between centralized testing and improved patient care. 
16. "These changes will help ensure that chiropractic practitioners are well-prepared to meet the demands of modern healthcare and continue to provide exceptional care to their patients."
• No supporting evidence is provided that links these changes to better preparation for modern healthcare demands. In fact, there are serious concerns about whether the burden of centralized testing will hinder, rather than help, future practitioners.

17. "Practical exams play an indispensable role in assessing a candidate’s ability to apply theoretical knowledge in real-world settings."
• Chiropractic schools already administer practical exams to assess candidates' abilities.
18. "Unlike written exams, which primarily evaluate cognitive understanding, practical exams focus on hands-on skills and clinical judgment, crucial for any healthcare provider."
• Chiropractic colleges are equipped to evaluate hands-on skills and clinical judgment through Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) and other practical evaluations.
19. "For chiropractors, this means demonstrating proficiency in areas such as patient examination, diagnosis, appropriate treatment, and chiropractic technique."
• Schools are already well-positioned to assess proficiency in patient examination, diagnosis, treatment, and chiropractic technique.
20. "Video recordings enable detailed reviews of candidate performance, promoting more objective evaluations and supporting examiner training for consistent assessments."
• Video recordings can also be utilized by chiropractic schools to enhance the objectivity and consistency of evaluations.
21. "Video recordings facilitate inter-rater reliability studies, ensuring uniformity through routine comparison and calibration of evaluators."
• Schools can conduct inter-rater reliability studies using video recordings to ensure consistency in assessments.
22. "Continuous improvement efforts can lead to the development of new testing methods and better alignment with evolving clinical practices, keeping pace with advancements in chiropractic care."
• Schools are capable of implementing continuous improvement in testing methods without the need for centralized NBCE involvement.

23. "Negotiations with local hotels and airlines for discounted rates aim to reduce the financial burden on examinees."
• This would be unnecessary if testing were conducted at regional or school-based locations.
24. "The stabilization of exam fees through centralized operations helps ensure that the overall cost of licensure remains manageable, benefiting both students and the profession at large."
• Stabilization of exam fees is irrelevant if the financial burden of travel is removed altogether.

25. "This can lead to valuable networking and the sharing of diverse perspectives, enriching the professional experience."
• Networking and community-building are better achieved through professional conferences, seminars, and educational programs, not high-stakes exams in a stressful environment.